If you’ve been following this blog long enough, you’ll know that I’m not a shoe person. CB is the shoe person around here – I’m more of a purse and jewelry person. I can talk about purses and jewelry all day, every day. I spend half the year in flip-flips and the other half of the year in quilted, faux-fur lined slippers (while I’m working, obviously). So I’m probably the wrong person to judge another woman for the insane amount of money she will spend on shoes. But in this particular case of Beyonce and her custom-made PMK high-top sneakers, it’s not just about the insane amount on money. It’s about Beyonce wanting (and getting) a ridiculous amount of animal skins put onto these crazy sneakers. For literally no reason other than “because she can.”

Frankly, they look like a reasonably ordinary pair of white trainers. But try telling that to Beyonce – or animal rights campaigners. For these shoes, commissioned by the singer, are made from no fewer than five different animal skins: stingray, anaconda, ostrich, crocodile and calf.

Fans and animal welfare groups alike condemned Beyonce, 31, as ‘cruel’ and ‘spoilt’ for having the trainers made.

A spokesman for animal charity PETA said: ‘These custom-made kicks come with a high price – and it’s paid by the various animals who were beaten and skinned alive or cruelly farmed and killed.’

He added: ‘We hope that one day she’ll go completely cruelty-free.’

Andrew Tyler, director of Animal Aid, described the trainers as ‘a brazen publicity stunt’. ‘The less that is said about it the better,’ he added.

The cream colour shoes are a take on the wedge-style trainer, made popular by designer Isabel Marant, but given a so-called Eden makeover by PMK using a hybrid of land and sea skins.

Called The King-Bey, the shoes, which have been given Beyonce’s approval, are decorated with gold accents. The price is as yet undisclosed, but a regular pair sells in excess of £230 ($350) so this embellished pair would sell for far more.

PMK is a favourite brand of Beyonce and her A-list husband Jay Z – indeed, Jay Z had a shoe designed for him last year- the Brooklyn Zoo – by the brand. His pair were as lavish as his wife’s, with an endless roll call of reptile skins used to make the shoe.

Of the trainer they designed for Jay-Z, PMK said: ‘The Brooklyn Zoo 1′s cannot be tamed with an elaborate combination of elephant-print, ostrich, python, boa, crocodile, lizard, alligator, suede, and sting ray intricately cut to transform the Jordan 1 from a basketball sneaker into the world’s most daring and dapper sneaker concepts known to man.’

[From The Mail]

I honestly don’t understand the whole fur thing, but I wear leather, and I will admit to lusting after some ostrich-skin purses and some purses with various reptile-skin accents. That being said, I balked at the laundry list of animal skins used to make these FUG shoes. If you’re going to wear animal skins, I think you should own it and be able to defend yourself, like, “this object is beautiful and I don’t give a crap about the suffering of these animals, so I don’t care what you say.” But I get the feeling that Beyonce doesn’t even think she owes anyone an explanation for anything – because she’s King Bey, because nothing she ever does is wrong, because why wouldn’t she wear fug high-tops made from six different animal skins? She’s like the Marie Antoinette of fug shoewear.

Photos courtesy of Beyonce’s Tumblr and PMK.

By now I’m sure you’ve heard about Beyonce’s latest gift to her public – her publicist sent an email to Buzzfeed demanding/requesting that they take down several unflattering photos of Beyonce as she performed at the Half-time show. It wasn’t a standard “take-down notice” which every blog gets at some point when the origin of a photo is up for grabs – this was just an attempt from Team Beyonce to control what copyrighted Getty images were used in stories about Beyonce, and she had no rights over the images. All of the photos Beyonce wanted pulled are ones where she’s making “RAWR! COME AT ME!!” faces. You can see the pics here.

But that’s not the only controversy about Beyonce these days. Apparently, PETA is all up on Bey because for Bey’s two major public appearances in 2013, she’s worn animal skins.

Beyoncé is in trouble with PETA. Again. The animal rights group is angry at Bey for shaking and shimmying in a Rubin Singer leather bodysuit, made of python, paneled iguana and leather.

“We would take a bet that if Beyoncé watched our video exposés, she’d probably not want to be seen again in anything made of snakes, lizards, rabbits or other animals who died painfully. Today’s fashions are trending toward humane vegan options, and Beyoncé’s Super Bowl outfit missed the mark on that score.”

PETA was also furious with the singer after she wore a three-quarter-length Christian Dior mink coat to sing at the inauguration.

The group adds that the “game was great” however, and expressed love for Baltimore Ravens linebacker Terrell Suggs, who just joined PETA in protesting the fur industry by starring in their new “Ink, Not Mink” campaign.

[From the NYDN]

Did you know her Half-time bodysuit was made out of python and iguana? That just seems completely random, especially since it just reads on camera like plain old leather. Why go so fancy (iguana?!) when it just looks like regular leather? As for Beyonce wearing mink at the Inauguration – yeah. She did that. Most people didn’t notice because she took off her mink coat for photos and she “performed” (lip synced) without the coat, in just the Pucci gown.

Photos courtesy of Beyonce’s Tumblr.

Kellan Lutz: Wolf Advocate!

I didn’t see any photos of this last week, but it seems as if someone (??) invited actual WOLVES to the LA premiere of Breaking Dawn Part II. Maybe they were union wolves, perhaps even the same ones used in the films… except I’m pretty sure all of the wolf stuff in the Twilight films are totally CGI in their entirety. So why invite live wolves to an LA premiere? Dunno. But PETA apparently had a problem with it, and Kellan Lutz is here to defend whomever’s decision it was to invite some wolves:

The Twilight saga’s “Breaking Dawn: Part 2” ended its round of domestic premieres Thursday with a Cinema Society screening, with no live animals present. The earlier LA premiere had three live wolves in attendance, angering PETA.

“I would love to know where the wolves came from,” cast member Kellan Lutz told us. “It’s not like we took them out of the wild. Not to step on PETA’s shoes or anything, but they are in a loving environment, they’re treated very well, and I don’t think we can point fingers at anyone for having a collar on too tight . . . I hope I’m not making enemies over there, because I am very much for PETA.”

He added, “I think the wolves were so sweet. It was a good addition.”

The New York Hollywood Reporter party at new Bowery club Finale instead had a stuffed pair for guests to pose with. Also in attendance were Peter Facinelli, Elizabeth Reaser and Ashley Greene, who told us that when the movie wrapped, the cast “literally just hung out with each other in our hotel room in the early morning and talked and reminisced.”

[From Page Six]

Is it weird that I’m kind of on PETA’s side? It would be one thing if the wolves were union and they had actually appeared in the film(s), but I think the studio was just like, “Man, you know what would be cool? Let’s have some actual wolves on the red carpet!” And it IS stupid. But Kellan Lutz wants you to know that the Lutzy wolves are fine. Kellan Lutz is a protector of animals and humanity. Kellan Lutz is a lover and a fighter and a wolf advocate. KELLAN LUTZ!

And here is my favorite part of the Berlin premiere of Breaking Dawn Part 2: some genius put a big, fake-looking wolf in the middle of the red carpet and everyone had to pose with it. It was actually pretty funny.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

NBC has announced that a new sitcom that I never heard of (although I watch shows on DVR and on demand via Hulu and XFinity, but they have commercials there too), “Animal Practice,” has been cancelled. Most coverage is focusing on the low ratings for the show, which had only about 3.85 million viewers compared to other higher-ranking sitcoms like ABC’s Modern Family at over 12 million. However PETA is of course declaring this a victory since they urged a boycott of this show no one watched. Animal Practice is about a veterinary hospital, and it stars the little Capuchin monkey, Crystal, who was also in the Hangover sequel. So of course PETA is against it, since no animals should perform anywhere or work at any job, basically:

EW explains this for us:

“PETA’s staff are celebrating today in response to news that NBC’s Animal Practice has been canceled,” the organization said in a statement. “The cancellation of Animal Practice sends the strong message that using animals for cheap laughs on TV shows is archaic and uninteresting to today’s viewers, who are sophisticated enough to know that not only is putting a monkey in a lab coat not funny, it’s also cruel.”

Yes, thank goodness that Crystal, the most pampered monkey on the planet, has been rescued from employment with a cast of comic actors in Hollywood (on a series that, if anything, idolized the animal kingdom).

NBC is replacing Animal Practice next month with the return of sitcom Whitney. PETA waged a protest against the freshman comedy, saying trained animals are often removed from their mothers in a “traumatic way,” undergo “physical abuse” during the training process and worried the sitcom might encourage people to buy monkeys as pets.

The organization claims 40,000 members wrote to NBC and the show’s advertisers. Though Animal Practice would have needed more than 50 times that number of extra viewers to have had a shot at remaining on the air.

[From EW]

I agree that animals shouldn’t be forced to perform in circuses under horrible abusive conditions, but come on, a TV show or movie? What are we going to do, use animatronic creatures in place of pets? Television tries to portray situations in life and we have pets. Maybe little performing monkeys aren’t the best example of that, but this is a lame thing to get up in arms about.

I tried to Google “PETA against dogs” to see what their stance was on dogs on television, and one of the suggested phrases was “PETA against seeing eye dogs.” I’m not sh*tting you, a VP at PETA said in 2009 that they “oppose most seeing-eye-dog programs” due to the fact that the dogs are bred, not obtained from shelters, and “people are prohibited from petting or playing with them and they cannot romp and run and interact with other dogs; and their lives are repeatedly disrupted.” That’s ridiculous! I also found this article in which a blind person who relies on a guide dog recounted a story about how her friend, also blind with a dog, was accosted by PETA protesters for treating her dog cruelly – just for relying on the dog to get her around! The protesters actually surrounded the blind woman and insulted her for having a guide dog. I can’t with PETA, this is despicable, so I’m going to switch topics and bitch about NBC now.

Instead of supporting their existing comedies, namely “Community,” NBC execs fired Community’s showrunner and pushed back the premiere of the new season to some unspecified future date. They put in this dud of a show and are facing the consequences. And instead of letting us see new episodes of “Community” they’re replacing “Animal Practice” with reruns of another lousy show, “Whitney.” So help me NBC better not mess up “Parenthood” or I am done with them.

Lady Gaga wears fur now. Sort of. Maybe. I’m still not sure, actually. As I covered earlier this week, Gaga stepped out in two different furry looks over the past week. One of the jackets (the pink one) is Armani, and the white-and-grey one is Hermes. There was debate that both jackets were fake, and Gaga refused to detail exactly what was going on. PETA got involved, and asked for Gaga to clarify her stance on wearing fur, considering she used to be vocally opposed to it. Well, Gaga has finally responded. And I’m still not sure WTF she’s talking about.

To the fans. i want you to know that I care deeply about your feelings and views, and I will always support your philosophies about life. We’ve been having over-arching conversations about society, equality, and politics for the past five years, and we should continue.

I do not however support violent, abusive, and childish campaigns for ANY CAUSE. Particularly one that I respect. “Animal Rights.” I am choosing not to comment on whether or not the furs I purchase are faux fur-pile or real because I would think it hypercritical not to acknowledge the python, ostrich, cow hide, leather, lamb, alligator, “kermit” and not to mention meat, that I have already worn.

This should already put me in a category as one who appreciates and adores the beauty of animals in fashion, but am not a strict vegan. I have truly always stayed away from skinned fur, especially i have never been able to afford a nice one, but this does not mean my morals are rigid and that I won’t bend at the sight of an absolute art piece of a coat. I have no chains about this.

You see a carcass, I see a museum pièce de résistance. But I am truly sorry to fans who are upset by this, its a fair and applaudable feeling about the health and safety of animals. I respect your views, please respect mine. And to campaigners, Save your flour to make bread for the children who are hungry. And Kim Kardashian is fabulous.

[Via Little Monsters]

If I’m reading this correctly (and really, who knows?), I think Gaga is basically saying that she’s always worn animal skins, just not fur, but that she always left the possibility open to wearing fur if she found a piece that she considered “beautiful” or “art”. Which has happened, apparently. So, she’s wearing fur because she considers it a piece of art, and she isn’t worried about being flour-bombed by PETA either, thus “Save your flour to make bread for the children who are hungry. And Kim Kardashian is fabulous.” All in all… I can’t really hate on Gaga for this. Right?

Photos courtesy of WENN, Little Monsters.

Lady Gaga posted the header photo on her Little Monsters site a few days ago. She was also pap’d in the same ensemble in New York. First point: Lady Gaga has a puppy now?!! The puppy looks like Blake Lively’s little Penny, right? Second point: is that pink thing real fur? It looks fake to me, but that’s probably because I have literally no idea why someone would buy a real fur dyed that horrible color. For what it’s worth, PETA thinks it’s real fur, and now PETA is super-pissed at Gaga:

Lady Gaga’s outlandish outfits often cause confusion but her latest hot-pink fur coat – which she bizarrely donned during a heat-wave – has sparked outrage amongst animal rights groups, RadarOnline.com can exclusively reveal.

The Bad Romance singer once expressed her disdain for animal cruelty in the fashion industry by wearing a hilarious jacket made of up Kermit the Frog pelts. “I thought it was commentary on not wearing fur, because I hate fur and don’t wear fur,” she said.
She has obviously since changed her tune, and now the woman who once shocked fans with her infamous meat dress at the MTV Video Music Awards is being targeted by PETA in a personal letter begging her to ditch her latest fur-wearing ways.

“Many of your gay fans, I among them, have long admired what you told Ellen: ‘I hate fur, and I don’t wear fur,’” wrote Dan Mathews, Senior Vice President of PETA (People For The Ethical Treatment Of Animals), in a message sent to Gaga obtained by RadarOnline.com.

“I included a link because these recent photos of you in fox and rabbit and with a wolf carcass make it appear that you have amnesia. I’m also including this brief video hosted by Tim Gunn showing the violent cruelty that you promote when you wear fur. What happened? Are your stylists telling you that it’s fake, or are you a turncoat?” Mathews asked. “Many gays are animal advocates because we recognize that the same arrogance and indifference that some have toward animal suffering has at times been directed toward us personally because of our orientation,” he explained.

With temperatures soaring into the 90s in New York last weekend, Gaga’s thick fuchsia Giorgio Armani quilted jacket and hat combo from their Fall 2012 collection – which she accessorized with a cute, and thankfully alive, poodle – was grossly inappropriate when she shopped at the designer’s boutique in Manhattan.

“By wearing those dumb furs in a heat wave, you’re making yourself a target just like the mindless Kim Kardashian. As we plan our fall campaigns, please tell us whether what you gracefully told Ellen was heartfelt or just a pose,” he asked.

[From Radar]

Ah, I see. PETA got a designer ID on the pink jacket and they found out that IS actual fur – by Armani, no less. Gross. I can’t believe Armani is making junk that looks like that. As for PETA’s complaints and threats… sure. They have a right to be angry, especially considering Gaga’s long history of paying lip-service to PETA’s causes. But now that she’s rich and she doesn’t care about anything but ART ART ART, she’s basically telling PETA to suck it.

And if that’s not awful enough, here are some photos of Gaga in Sofia, Bulgaria yesterday, where she was preparing to play her first gig of her European tour. PUPPY. And THAT looks like real fur to me.

Photos courtesy of WENN, Little Monsters.